dang beat me too it lol! But yea, the Jedi had been trained for millenia to focus they're martial skills and force powers through swordsmanship. Not saying Jedi haven't used blasters on certain occasions though... Usually because they are under cover, or have been relieved of their lightsaber

Blasters power cells can be drained, their bolts can be absorbed or deflected by energy shields. Explosives can be deflected or their explosions prevented from affecting the intended target(s).

The Jedi understand these theories and use lightsabers instead, because once the distance between them and their enemies is closed, the lightsaber can overpower many forms of offense and defense.

Take Jango Fett for example. He fired at Mace Windu in Episode II during the arena battle. Windu deflected all the blaster bolts as he charged him, neutralizing their effectiveness, and then decapitated Fett.

I fought on the battlefield. I retired to embrace a life of discovery and profit. I carve my own path in life and am better for it.

The Jedi understand these theories and use lightsabers instead, because once the distance between them and their enemies is closed, the lightsaber can overpower many forms of offense and defense.

Take Boba Fett for example. He fired at Mace Windu in Episode II during the arena battle. Windu deflected all the blaster bolts as he charged him, neutralizing their effectiveness, and then decapitated Fett.

Yes, you did well by pointing out my mistake. I shall reference things more carefully in the future. So, distance was key to Windu killing Jango Fett? Was there no way Jango could have compensated by using his jet pack? I thought he would have jumped away from Windu as he charged towards him.

I fought on the battlefield. I retired to embrace a life of discovery and profit. I carve my own path in life and am better for it.

The real question is why don't Star Wars characters use bullet-based weapons? They have the tech to do all of this:
Eliminate weight concerns and recoil almost entirely.
Create practical caseless rounds.
Scopes that auto-compensate for bullet drop, wind, time-to-target, etc.
And solve most of the problems that modern firearms face.

The main advantage of energy weapons is near-instantaneous time-to-target. However, SW blasters clearly don't have that advantage. In fact, we can see from the films that blaster bolts move slowly compared to bullets. The rate of fire of all blasters seen in the films and games is also lower than that of even our current projectile weapons. Also, a blaster shot, if not immediately deadly, would create a far cleaner wound than a bullet, lowering the chances of an opponent dying from blood loss etc. So why don't they use bullets? (SW armor clearly doesn't stop projectiles, see: Ewok spears)

The answer is of course that bullets aren't 'space opera' enough, but hey, I love a good nitpick.

Blaster bolts are easier to counter than bullets, I think. Reflective materials and force redirection have proven themselves to be simple yet very effective counters to them. Bullets on the other hand travel faster than blaster bolts, so the ability to counter them is physically tougher. I would have thought that energy would not be so easy to defend against, since it is based on greater than normal heat.

I fought on the battlefield. I retired to embrace a life of discovery and profit. I carve my own path in life and am better for it.

so you are saying that energy based projectiles such as a blaster bolt, a beam of energy, with no physical presence, only as a beam of energy, with no affect by wind, ballistics and physical drag, travel slower than a bullet?

A bullet is a physical piece of material, it is affected by gravity to a huge degree, it is affected by every possible environmental variable that exists, from, wind, to humidity, to temperature of the air around it, to the density of the air around it. a bullet is also wieghed down by the fact that it is a physical piece of matter. It can only go so fast before the stress on the projectile become so great, that it rips itself apart.

A bullet is not faster than an energy based projectile. Furthermore, as a piece of material, not energy, it is possible for a force user to stop, deflect, or destroy a bullet mid flight using the force alone.

The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin

These have existed in the star wars universe. Wookieepedia the VERPINE SNIPER RIFLE. it is essentially a rail gun, using a line of electro-magnets, firing a magnetic projectile, with not powder or combustion, no recoil, and in the Republic Commando Triple Zero book, there is an adjustable scope.

Second Aura Sing uses a auto-compensating scope in her signature Adventurer slugthrower rifle.

The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin

so you are saying that energy based projectiles such as a blaster bolt, a beam of energy, with no physical presence, only as a beam of energy, with no affect by wind, ballistics and physical drag, travel slower than a bullet?

A bullet is a physical piece of material, it is affected by gravity to a huge degree, it is affected by every possible environmental variable that exists, from, wind, to humidity, to temperature of the air around it, to the density of the air around it. a bullet is also wieghed down by the fact that it is a physical piece of matter. It can only go so fast before the stress on the projectile become so great, that it rips itself apart.

A bullet is not faster than an energy based projectile. Furthermore, as a piece of material, not energy, it is possible for a force user to stop, deflect, or destroy a bullet mid flight using the force alone.

The thing is, Star Wars blasters don't work like a real-world energy weapon would. Like it or not (and in many cases I don't), what you see in the films supersedes any other source canon-wise, and blaster bolts can be seen to move quite slowly. Gravity and other factors do limit the range and speed of projectile weapons, however our current firearms don't even approach what would be possible with SW technology in those regards, and within effective range, tech like auto-compensating sights would render differences moot. As well as what I listed above, they have the tech to eliminate muzzle flash and almost all noise, which coupled with the lack of any visible bolt, would give the user a huge advantage in a firefight, as the enemy would have a much harder time locating the shooter.

Even our comparatively primitive modern firearms outstrip the capabilities of Star Wars blasters. I've already addressed rate of fire and the speed of the projectile, so let's look at maximum effective range, the one advantage a blaster might have. Some of the Star Wars weapons only have data saying 'range', so I'm going to be charitable and assume this is maximum effective range, not maximum range. I've attempted to compare weapons that fill the same roles, for fairness' sake.

As for Force-users, they make up a tiny percentage of people in the galaxy, and even if they could stop or deflect a bullet, it would be no less effective than a blaster bolt. Even so, even more powerful Force-users have been taken by surprise by blasters, and a far faster, stealthier weapon like a projectile weapon would make surprising them much easier. The depiction of Force-based telekinesis in Star Wars has been wildly inconsistent, but a non-surprised Jedi could likely stop a bullet (if he reacted in time). It would take quite a powerful Jedi to stop multiple bullets in quick succession, however. Seeing as Jedi sense danger in a vague fashion (not a full rundown of the opponent's armament), and have been trained to instinctively block ranged attacks with a lightsaber, it's quite probable that they'd only realize the nature of the projectile too late to stop it with the Force, and would melt one bullet just to be hit by the second (If one had plenty of money, a cortosis bullet shorting out the lightsaber for a follow-up killshot would simplify things further). The greater range of projectile weapons would also make it much harder for a force-user to get within striking distance before the shooter escapes or gets a solid hit.

Now excuse me, I have to lift weights, run 5 miles and watch some sports in order to balance out the nerd points I racked up with that post.

Edit: I realize that there are projectile weapons in Star Wars, however they seem to be used only by very specialized groups (The Verpine stuff from the RC books, and various, more primitive ones in Shatterpoint). I just don't see why they aren't just as common, if not more so, than blasters. (Understandable in the films because of the lack of space-opera feel, but less so in the generally more grounded EU)

These have existed in the star wars universe. Wookieepedia the VERPINE SNIPER RIFLE. it is essentially a rail gun, using a line of electro-magnets, firing a magnetic projectile, with not powder or combustion, no recoil, and in the Republic Commando Triple Zero book, there is an adjustable scope.

Second Aura Sing uses a auto-compensating scope in her signature Adventurer slugthrower rifle.

There are projectile weapons in the Star Wars universe, the ballistics of the Star Wars blasters isn't a well known thing. It would be interesting to know the ins and outs of a blaster, but as far was right now goes, there is no technical data on why the blaster bolts are as slow as they appear to be, instead of the speed of light, which is teoretically how fast an energy projectile weapon should be.

The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin

They use blasters because they can hold significantly more rounds than a projectile weapon. Also, blaster bolts move that slow because it makes for a better movie if we can see them. In reality they would be invisible like bullets. Also, I know there would be overheating concerns, but what about continuous fire? That's way better than an automatic weapon, and some of the tanks and artillery in Star Wars already have it. That, if anything, would make energy more effective than a projectile. There's also that whole thing about not having to order giant shipments of ammo. An army armed with energy weapons can reload at an electrical outlet.

Also, Jedi use swords because swords are cool and artistic. There is no martial function of the sword, even in close combat, that cannot be improved upon by a projectile weapon. Sure you can argue about blocking bolts, etc., but I don't buy it. If they can do that much with a stick then imagine how much they could do with the Star Wars equivalent of an Uzi in one hand and a variation on a Gungan shield in the other. It would be insane domination.

You know what? I'm going to make two exceptions. 1. Swords are good for fighting people with other swords. You can't block an energy sword with your gun stock. 2. Also, swords can dispatch multiple enemies who are in close proximity while guns can only handle one person at a time. But then why would someone who has a gun stand in close proximity to you?

P.S. I saw a Samurai master on TV who could cut a bullet in half with the edge of a katana sword, a feat even greater than what we have seen Jedi do, but I don't think he could do it for multiple shots in succession.

I disagree Jedi have the ability to dodge laser fire with a saber, So if they all used conventional weapons such as guns then in my opinion Jedi would be boring, Jedi don't rely on the force alone, As all Jedi are recognized by carrying a saber depicting what rank they hold.

If you watch Revenge of the Sith when they track down the bounty hunter everyone stops dead in their tracks when Jedi show up!!

that is kind of a different situation though, in a bar full of normal, "people", people who don't see a lightsaber ever, and all of a sudden one flashes to life across the bar and cuts some gun wielding maniac's(Zam) hand off, everyone is going to take notice, and the music will stop.

Its not that the Jedi show up, and everything comes to a grinding halt, it is the lightsaber that got everyone's attention. The only one's that can tell the difference between a force user and a regular person, is another force user. They can sense that another force user is near. Other than than, you could be walking calmy by the Senate building on Coruscant, and pass someone in a beard, and never think twice about it, never knowing that that person was just Obi-Wan, and could mind trick you to throw yourself into oncoming traffic.

The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin

that is kind of a different situation though, in a bar full of normal, "people", people who don't see a lightsaber ever, and all of a sudden one flashes to life across the bar and cuts some gun wielding maniac's(Zam) hand off, everyone is going to take notice, and the music will stop.

Its not that the Jedi show up, and everything comes to a grinding halt, it is the lightsaber that got everyone's attention. The only one's that can tell the difference between a force user and a regular person, is another force user. They can sense that another force user is near. Other than than, you could be walking calmy by the Senate building on Coruscant, and pass someone in a beard, and never think twice about it, never knowing that that person was just Obi-Wan, and could mind trick you to throw yourself into oncoming traffic.

That is true also, But i think without a saber they wouldn't be referred to as Jedi!!

thats why i used the term "force user", because they could be either a Jedi or Sith, which by the way, are just organizations within the force user community. There can be a force user that is neither a Jedi or Sith, and can still be light or dark side force user, and still not be a Jedi or Sith, just a force user.

The light saber alone doesn't make a force user a Jedi or Sith, a Jedi does what Jedi do, and Sith do what Sith do. It is possible to exist between the two, and not be a member of either, and still have a lightsaber, as long as you have the knowledge to build a lightsaber, you still do not have to be a Jedi or SIth to have it.

General Grievous was neither a Jedi or Sith, but he had an abundance of lightsabers.

The very existence of flamethrowers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." -George Carlin

thats why i used the term "force user", because they could be either a Jedi or Sith, which by the way, are just organizations within the force user community. There can be a force user that is neither a Jedi or Sith, and can still be light or dark side force user, and still not be a Jedi or Sith, just a force user.

The light saber alone doesn't make a force user a Jedi or Sith, a Jedi does what Jedi do, and Sith do what Sith do. It is possible to exist between the two, and not be a member of either, and still have a lightsaber, as long as you have the knowledge to build a lightsaber, you still do not have to be a Jedi or SIth to have it.

General Grievous was neither a Jedi or Sith, but he had an abundance of lightsabers.

I'm curious to know what happened to grievous, Reading online he was human at one time and was a good guy!

I fill myself with shame for accepting a setting where spaceships don't need to discharge built-up heat from space travel, planets can have water-filled cores or be covered entirely in skyscrapers, and a mystical energy field that goes through all living things grants some people magic powers.

And then trying to apply logic and science to it. I think I have a problem.

I fill myself with shame for accepting a setting where spaceships don't need to discharge built-up heat from space travel, planets can have water-filled cores or be covered entirely in skyscrapers, and a mystical energy field that goes through all living things grants some people magic powers.

And then trying to apply logic and science to it. I think I have a problem.

Yeah and then there's that whole thing about there being no sound in space and light being immaterial and therefore unable to create physical barriers, but whatever.

Also, don't forget the Felucians from TFU! They have force powers.

I think that for certain types of troops in the Star Wars universe, lightsaber bayonets would be very appropriate.

After further consideration of the matter, I believe energy weapons to be superior to projectile ones. They are not affected necessarily by greater mass and can disintegrate it, a feat no projectile can perform against a denser alloy than its own. The problem of storage is also eliminated as energy cells require less space than physical ammunition. Greater development of manīs mind is also reflected in the invention of insubstantial arms.

I fought on the battlefield. I retired to embrace a life of discovery and profit. I carve my own path in life and am better for it.

What about: it's all fantasy and laser bolts look nicer than projectiles?

That's pretty much what I said at the end of my first post. Something along the lines of 'using bullets wouldn't be space-opera enough'. Star Wars is just not 'hard' science fiction. It's 'soft' enough that really I should be calling it space fantasy (since fantasy doesn't need to be medieval).

But I still couldn't resist a good nitpick. Hey, at least we're not arguing about whether or not the Endor Holocaust would have happened.

On a side note, from the Grey Paladin page, it sounds like the author of the books they were in had recently seen the movie 'Wanted', what with bending blaster bolts, and deflecting them with other blaster bolts. Which would kind of make sense with bullet-using force-user (or maybe we've just been unfair to stormtroopers' aiming ability, and Luke's been 'curving the blaster bolt' away from him the entire time). Oh god I'm nitpicking again. It's like I have a disease.